Player The unfortunately low-ceilinged Shaolin monastery of Victor Wembanyama

Sga is averaging 32/4.6/6.4 and will deservedly win the MVP.
Luka is at 33/8/9 with worse TS% than Wemby and is a traffic cone on defense.
Those 20 extra points his offense generates are given right back on the other end.
Yes, assuming Joker is not eligible, SGA will be Wemby's biggest competitor for MVP but this also assuming Wemby stays healthy and Spurs going to maintain 2nd seed
 
Sga is averaging 32/4.6/6.4 and will deservedly win the MVP.
Luka is at 33/8/9 with worse TS% than Wemby and is a traffic cone on defense.
Those 20 extra points his offense generates are given right back on the other end.

I'd guess that Luka is more likely to win; the press loves to lick the Fakers taint...
 
It looks like the league wants wemby to win it or atleast he’s in the conversation. He’s still in top 5 even with mediocre stats. If the spurs win 5 straight with wemby putting 30+pts/13/3/3 i think he will jump in the top 2.
 
It looks like the league wants wemby to win it or atleast he’s in the conversation. He’s still in top 5 even with mediocre stats. If the spurs win 5 straight with wemby putting 30+pts/13/3/3 i think he will jump in the top 2.
If the league wants Vic to win they'd need to relax the 65-game threshold which obviously isn't happening.
Oh, boy, he's really cutting it close.
 
If the league wants Vic to win they'd need to relax the 65-game threshold which obviously isn't happening.
Oh, boy, he's really cutting it close.
No, the league obviously wants him to win it. Its the spurs organization who is the hindrance on wemby’s mvp chances by playin him less minutes and sitting him games.
 
Even a healthy Wemby isn’t top 5 in MVP right now. A little behind Cade and Ant imo. It’s the DPOY that gets on my nerves - mostly because he obviously should have won it his rookie year but people think it’s a team award for some stupid reason. And now year 3 it’s another nope because of an arbitrary cutoff threshold.
 
Even a healthy Wemby isn’t top 5 in MVP right now. A little behind Cade and Ant imo. It’s the DPOY that gets on my nerves - mostly because he obviously should have won it his rookie year but people think it’s a team award for some stupid reason. And now year 3 it’s another nope because of an arbitrary cutoff threshold.
He is the the top 5 in latest rankings because league wants him to win it and they are hiving him a chance. Spurs organization is the hindrance tbh. And also wemby as superstar/ franchise player he should be in control not the other way around.
 
He is the the top 5 in latest rankings because league wants him to win it and they are hiving him a chance. Spurs organization is the hindrance tbh. And also wemby as superstar/ franchise player he should be in control not the other way around.
The league doesn't want Victor to be MVP. The league wants to put big names on these lists in the race for this or that award.

The league was built on the same principle as the star system invented by the major movie studios in the 1920s. Originally, films were built around a subject, and the names of the actors didn't even appear on the poster. Thanks to the advent of certain artists such as Chaplin, they began to develop a commercial and industrial logic around actors and actresses. Sometimes by bringing them together on screen. Paramount's predecessor, Famous Players, developed this logic, which became the norm in Hollywood. It is still the logic today, a logic that exists nowhere else.

In basketball, it's the same. The league was built around personalities rather than brands (the opposite of Europe, for example). The league doesn't care who wins the titles. Instead, it needs to create a whole narrative around the stars. Everything is copied from the movie star system: publicity around personalities, scandal management, exclusivity contracts, obligations to the league and the press. Even the awards are modeled on the Oscars, which were supposed to complete this star system logic in the late 1920s. The important thing for the league is not that Victor or someone else wins a title, but that everyone talks about the possibility. All the stars are interchangeable.

A star is a star: It's important to bring out personalities in teams and in the league. If we compare this with what is done in Europe, for example, there is much more emphasis on team dynamics. That's why in Europe, coaches look for different solutions for each game and during each game to destabilize the opposing defense, with the direct result that offensive leaders rarely remain the same player from one game to the next. In France, to describe the fact that star players are put forward in the NBA, we talk about “ticket shots.” This means that franchise players have the green light to shoot. The very concept of franchise players does not exist in Europe. It is very specific to the NBA.

The entire NBA business, especially the press, is based on this star system logic. Even the Spurs are subject to it, and not just with Victor. The Big Three is nothing more than a reproduction of the star alliance logic imagined by the studios after the crisis of 1929. Even if its construction is not premeditated, it results from a narrative logic built around stars.

For every NBA player, there is a story to be created. They don't care who is at the top of the bill, the important thing is to look up at the billboard with wide eyes. And if necessary, discuss who you find there. Each title on the poster could be “Who is the best?” If it’s not Victor, it’s one of his own.
 
Wemby will win multiple MVPs one day. Not sure why anyone would think the league doesn't want that and whether they do or not, it's happening as long as he's healthy.
 
The league doesn't want Victor to be MVP. The league wants to put big names on these lists in the race for this or that award.

The league was built on the same principle as the star system invented by the major movie studios in the 1920s. Originally, films were built around a subject, and the names of the actors didn't even appear on the poster. Thanks to the advent of certain artists such as Chaplin, they began to develop a commercial and industrial logic around actors and actresses. Sometimes by bringing them together on screen. Paramount's predecessor, Famous Players, developed this logic, which became the norm in Hollywood. It is still the logic today, a logic that exists nowhere else.

In basketball, it's the same. The league was built around personalities rather than brands (the opposite of Europe, for example). The league doesn't care who wins the titles. Instead, it needs to create a whole narrative around the stars. Everything is copied from the movie star system: publicity around personalities, scandal management, exclusivity contracts, obligations to the league and the press. Even the awards are modeled on the Oscars, which were supposed to complete this star system logic in the late 1920s. The important thing for the league is not that Victor or someone else wins a title, but that everyone talks about the possibility. All the stars are interchangeable.

A star is a star: It's important to bring out personalities in teams and in the league. If we compare this with what is done in Europe, for example, there is much more emphasis on team dynamics. That's why in Europe, coaches look for different solutions for each game and during each game to destabilize the opposing defense, with the direct result that offensive leaders rarely remain the same player from one game to the next. In France, to describe the fact that star players are put forward in the NBA, we talk about “ticket shots.” This means that franchise players have the green light to shoot. The very concept of franchise players does not exist in Europe. It is very specific to the NBA.

The entire NBA business, especially the press, is based on this star system logic. Even the Spurs are subject to it, and not just with Victor. The Big Three is nothing more than a reproduction of the star alliance logic imagined by the studios after the crisis of 1929. Even if its construction is not premeditated, it results from a narrative logic built around stars.

For every NBA player, there is a story to be created. They don't care who is at the top of the bill, the important thing is to look up at the billboard with wide eyes. And if necessary, discuss who you find there. Each title on the poster could be “Who is the best?” If it’s not Victor, it’s one of his own.

On a global note NBA revenues are growing while viewership is declining for the last 10 years... not sure how this is sustainable. NBA is at a cornerstone with old stars (Lebron, Curry, KD...) on the verge of retirement, the new stars have quite a diffent profile, for one most of them are not american (SGA, Luka, Jokic, Victor...) and then they seem quite far from the usual start system at the exception of Ant. This change is awesome for the global visibility but a challenge for US viewership and game attendance. All of that in the context of a potential US expansion, an increase of injuries, too many games and even a Europe expansion.

I agree that whether with Victor or not NBA will promote stars but in this overall context, Victor is a great product due to his potential and his freakish nature and crazy stuff he is capable to do. At the end what matters is how attractive is Victor for the league, so far I would say so good... his highlights are everywhere, he is selling jersey. I'm not sure NBA will "help" Vicor narrative and accolades but it does not seem in NBA interest to spoil it by letting defense targeting his knees or not giving whistle love eventhough recently one can wonder
 
On a global note NBA revenues are growing while viewership is declining for the last 10 years... not sure how this is sustainable.
Christmas games had the best ratings in many years.
Amazon and NBC broadcasting instead of TNT helps a lot with the domestic audience.
The issue is that if you're to watch whatever you want, you still need the LP+local broadcaster+ESPN/Amazon/NBC subscriptions which is just idiotic.
They're basically extorting hardcore fans for a lot of money instead of getting higher viewership numbers with cheaper subscriptions.

NBA is at a cornerstone with old stars (Lebron, Curry, KD...) on the verge of retirement, the new stars have quite a diffent profile, for one most of them are not american (SGA, Luka, Jokic, Victor...) and then they seem quite far from the usual start system at the exception of Ant. This change is awesome for the global visibility but a challenge for US viewership and game attendance. All of that in the context of a potential US expansion, an increase of injuries, too many games and even a Europe expansion.
Times change and if you look at the all-star voting fans are already over those older stars.
While Europeans aren't as marketable in a traditional American sense, you can't say Wemby/Luka/Jokic aren't must see TV and great characters to have as the new faces of the league. SGA is the only boring one.
 
Christmas games had the best ratings in many years.
Amazon and NBC broadcasting instead of TNT helps a lot with the domestic audience.
The issue is that if you're to watch whatever you want, you still need the LP+local broadcaster+ESPN/Amazon/NBC subscriptions which is just idiotic.
They're basically extorting hardcore fans for a lot of money instead of getting higher viewership numbers with cheaper subscriptions.


Times change and if you look at the all-star voting fans are already over those older stars.
While Europeans aren't as marketable in a traditional American sense, you can't say Wemby/Luka/Jokic aren't must see TV and great characters to have as the new faces of the league. SGA is the only boring one.

Ratings decrease trend seem to come to an halt but it is still very recent. Last 10 years trend is quite dramatic but again you are right about crazy subscriptions but also the highlight trend watching rather than the whole games. To make a parallel it's a bit like games focusing on few whales spending rather than low spending spread a lot of people. I'm here just wondering if it is sustainable tbh long term, it worked last 5 to 6 years tho.

Oh I agree Jokic, Luka, Victor are awesome characters with very peculiar personalities, I just don't know US public acceptance of that. Look at Jokic dude is putting never seen before numbers, makes crazy plays games after games and is a great character but at the same time, he is not THE big star ala Curry, Jordan, Lebron or Magic, Shaq. It seems to me he is recognized by knowledgeable fans but not that known by the general public tbh. I believe if you ask random people in the streets not following at all the NBA they know Lebron name but won't be able to name Jokic.
 
On a global note NBA revenues are growing while viewership is declining for the last 10 years... not sure how this is sustainable. NBA is at a cornerstone with old stars (Lebron, Curry, KD...) on the verge of retirement, the new stars have quite a diffent profile, for one most of them are not american (SGA, Luka, Jokic, Victor...) and then they seem quite far from the usual start system at the exception of Ant. This change is awesome for the global visibility but a challenge for US viewership and game attendance. All of that in the context of a potential US expansion, an increase of injuries, too many games and even a Europe expansion.

I agree that whether with Victor or not NBA will promote stars but in this overall context, Victor is a great product due to his potential and his freakish nature and crazy stuff he is capable to do. At the end what matters is how attractive is Victor for the league, so far I would say so good... his highlights are everywhere, he is selling jersey. I'm not sure NBA will "help" Vicor narrative and accolades but it does not seem in NBA interest to spoil it by letting defense targeting his knees or not giving whistle love eventhough recently one can wonder
Cade is coming of age and Flagg, Castle, Harper, AJ, Peterson and Boozer are all hitting the league at the right time. The NBA really needs 3-4 of these guys to truly ascend to stardom to fill the void that Bron, Curry and KD are about to leave.

In my opinion anyway.
 
Cade is coming of age and Flagg, Castle, Harper, AJ, Peterson and Boozer are all hitting the league at the right time. The NBA really needs 3-4 of these guys to truly ascend to stardom to fill the void that Bron, Curry and KD are about to leave.

In my opinion anyway.
i mean, who are "the guys" between 25 and 29 now?

Shai, Tatum, Haliburton, Brunson, Mitchell, Bam, Booker, Zion...

like dont get me wrong. great players. but none of these guys are legends. if OKC wins some more, SGA maybe
 
Back
Top